Fri 24th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 24th Oct 2014 at 12:34pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Organisers hope Eucharistic Congress will revive Irish Church

By on Friday, 3 June 2011

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin (Niall Carson/PA Wire)

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin (Niall Carson/PA Wire)

The organisers of the 50th International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin next year have said they hope the event will help to reinvigorate the Irish Church.

Delegates from some 70 countries met on June 1-3 to hear plans for the events that Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin described as a “vital element in the reform agenda of the Irish Church”.

Participants at congress, which takes place on June 10-17, 2012, will hear reflections, catechesis and workshops from leading bishops and theologians. A day devoted to ecumenical communion through baptism will be led by the Anglican Archbishop of Dublin, the Most Rev Michael Jackson.

Cardinal Peter Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, will preside at a day dedicated to reconciliation. That session will also be addressed by Richard Moore, who was blinded by a British Army rubber bullet in Northern Ireland in 1972. Mr Moore subsequently tracked down the soldier who fired the round and established a friendship with him.

Other senior Church leaders who have so far been confirmed to lead events are Honduran Cardinal Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga and Cardinal André Vingt-Trois of Paris.

Fr Kevin Doran, secretary-general of the 2012 congress, said that he expected around 25,000 people to participate in the catechesis and workshops and 80,000 to participate in the concluding Mass. The theme for the congress is “The Eucharist: Communion With Christ and With One Another”.

To raise awareness about the event a congress bell has been taken to parishes and Catholic schools around Ireland. In each community the bell is rung as a sign of invitation to the Dublin event.

More information is available on the congress website,

The Irish Church will host a national eucharistic congress at Knock shrine, in County Mayo, on June 25-26.

  • AgingPapist

    A Eucharistic Congress will do about as much to restore the people of Ireland to the Roman Church as conjuring up the tooth fairy. Only  the clergy could be this dense and totally clueless to what has happened and what it will take to purify the entire Church.  Public liturgical theater and pious shows are not the answer. The election of all future bishops by a National Irish Synod with all men and women participating, plus the resignation of Pope Benedict will be a good first start.

  • Shane

    What a travesty this is.  Just do it like the last one:

  • Harper

    AgingPapist does not live in the real world. The only thing he is realistic about is that he is aging, and that applies to many of those survivors who are of like mind. These are dating like cuban heels and flared trousers. They sound ridiculous. His dissenting generation was an aberration, a product of a post-war time when the Church momentarily appeared to lose its confidence in its historic mission, and many foolishly thought that change was everything. The commercial world has long realised that replacing gtraditional shop fronts with aluminium windows and mindless modern designs was stupid and are busy replacing these, not least in Ireland, but the tamborine generation, never noted for its wisdom, still clings to these vanities.

    What the Irish Church needs, apart from a general clearing out of what Benedict XVI rightly called “filth” is the recovery of a dignified liturgy. The standards of pre-Vatican 2 diocescan liturgy were generally very poor, but at least the Mass was dignified. The religious orders of pre-decadent Jesuits, Benedictines and (still to the good) Dominicans provided a welcome connection with wider Catholicism. Since V2 however, Irish liturgy has been truly appaling, with priests in silly 1960s Star Trek stoles (not even vestments), over-empowered ministers of the eucharist (often the sharp elbowed gossips and self appointed church of the laity), out-of-tune singers with their democratic (anyone-can-play) guitar liturgies, and sermons full of pscyhobabble.

  • recusant

    Never a truer word said. The standards of liturgy in Ireland have been dire for my entire life, with too many Fr Trendys and bored PPs.

  • Ratbag

    I agree with you on every count – even about your descriptions of Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist… and I’m an EMHE! Though, I was not self-appointed. My parish priest appointed me and, in obedience to God and my priest, I accepted… as someone who hates parish cliques and has no time for them because they choke parish life like virulent weeds.

    I hope the Irish heirarchy does not make a holy mess out of the Eucharistic Congress and turn it into a circus.

    Dignity and majesty will not go amiss… then Ireland will be given a fighting chance to recover from their problems.

  • Harper

    AgingPapist: Please change your name, for you are not a papist by any definition. There is no need to engage in a futile hope to change the Catholic Church, its hierarchy and the papal office. If this really is your view, you should transfer to the “Ancient Celtic” (according to fairy-story-history, given its overwhelming preponderance of Cromwellian and – occasional – Huguenot surnames in its clergy and congregations)  Church of Ireland, in communion with Canterbury, thanks to the Reformation in charge (as in England and Wales) of its ancient churches, in communion with Canterbury. The CofI have a “national” synod, in which women and men elect “bishops”, so you will have no problem there. They refer to the Catholic Church (despite its Eastern Rites) as an equal (but-simply-larger) church; being the  “Roman” Church in Ireland it is a counter-reformation Italianate import which curiously managed to lure the common Irish population from the “Ancient-Celtic”-Established-Anglican Church of Ireland, which had just thrown off the Roman Yoke and recovered its ancient proto-Protestant/Erastian/Anglican independence, thanks to Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, the first three Stuarts, before settling on the Dutch Reformed Church William IV, and ultimately the Lutheran Hanoverians. You could become AgingAnglican or AgingHibernian, or, alternatively, a (Presbyterian) member of the established Church of Scotland, to which the Queen adheres when she is North o’the Border and attends her local Craithie Church at Balmoral. Either way, both these established churches (the former established Church of Ireland even more so) embody all of your ideals. Occasionally, some ex-(R)Catholic clergy wishing to marry defect to them: no instruction necessary. Clearly, you would be happier there.

    I myself would be more confident adhering to the Catholic Church, which has seen external threats from Atilla to Luther to Hitler and Mussolini, as well as internal threats from the Great Schism to (relatively very few) corrupt popes, anti-clerical governments in France, Mexico and (currently) Spain, clerical scandals and indiscipline. You may be panicking, lacking this long view, but I know which body of believers will be – indeed is guaranteed to be despite its human frailty – there until to the end of time, having preserved the teachings of Christ – and which will have become chaff in the wind.

  • Harper

    @Ratbag. Many thanks. I felt more than a little guilty for being over-harsh about EME. I know excellent people (including my own brother) to this. I just feel so weary when I am in an Irish Catholic church on a weekday, there are only a handful of people in the congregation, but yet a battalion of women EMEs, often pudding-bowled hairstyled and scholl sandled and with ordination ambitions, descend on the Tabernacle, encouraged by the Star Trek garbed PP, who is constantly “thanking” people for coming, as doubtless he did – to his mother’s approval – those who attended his ordination at Maynooth.They never seem to realise just how silly and dated they look, and how “uncool” to the young they seek to impress.

  • Weary Convert

    ” (relatively very few) corrupt popes”  – Oh my goodness me! Let’s look at two sorts of corruption.  Firstly the obvious of stealing the Church’s wealth, vastly enriching relatives, governing the Papal states as if they were personal property etc etc – try the history books (not pious hagiography) to see that the line of corrupt Popes stretches out of sight like Banquo’s descendants in “Macbeth.”( I think).  But then, sometimes these fellows left behind something worthwhile – buildings, paintings, etc.  Unlike the other, even nastier corruption – the corruption of power.  Take as a particularly unpleasant example, the vile Saint Pius V and read up on the tortures and killings and persecutions and other horrors that he imposed.

    Sorry my dear chap, when you look at the history of the Church, Papal corruption of one sort or the other was the norm, I’m afraid.

    As to Mr Harper’s comment that to want to change the Church means someone cannot be a Catholic, oh really – words (almost) fail me.  Take for example the Council of Trent that the Ultras love, and the determination of secular rulers and the Counter-reformation reformers to force the Popes to change the church from a pit of vipers to something at least more respectable and worthy of a certain allegiance.

    And if the gentleman hates the thought of changing the way bishops are chosen, was not the first replacement bishop – Matthias – chosen by a lot?  Not quite the acceptable method today but then looking around, just maybe there is something in it. 

  • Ratbag

    You know what, Harper, you should not feel guilty about your observations of EME. They are everywhere… and they know who they are! I’m just as weary of them, too, in the UK.

    It is hard to feel that lovely, refreshing feeling from attending Mass when it has been done in such a heated rush you’d think you’ve been listening to the racing commentary from Leopardstown instead of the Word of God.

    What’s happened to the Irish saying ‘When God made time, he made plenty of it’?

    Does PP think he’s in for a shout at presenting ‘The Late Late Show’ when he thanks people for coming to Mass? Heck, some priests do that here, too.

    Incidentally, our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has effectively soldered, galvanised and riveted the tin lid on any discussion regarding women’s ordination… so, those pudding-bowled, scholl sandled women are wasting their energy harbouring any ambitions in that line … don’t tell ‘em I said that!

    If it is any consolation, the trendy Masses and Fr Trendies are fading like a pair of bell bottoms, kipper ties and kidney soup. The only problem is that some Fr Trendies are slow on the uptake in this respect and are, sadly, stuck in a timewarp. 

    As much as we’d love to walk up to the priest and say ‘live long and prosper’, or ‘beam me up, Scotty!’, the only thing we can do is hold our tongue (difficult though this may be when faced with vestments which won’t look out of place at a sci-fi convention).

    Instead, we must pray to The Holy Spirit for our priests and heirarchy that they themselves will see the light and restore decorum, dignity and majesty to the Mass and the Church.

    You, and the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, are assured of our prayers.

  • Harper

    Weary Convert appears to be weary indeed, and is doubtless a candidate for  “Anglican” (formerly Catholic) Canterbury or Apostolic Primitive Celtic/Anglican (formerly Catholic) Armagh, both of which adhere to his views. Manifestly he has never heard of Newman’s Development of Doctrine, let alone acquired a grasp of the scale and violent land grabs of the Anglo-Welsh and Irish reformations. Time to “convert” (apostasise) elsewhere, I think. He and I (and I suspect many on here) would be much happier, so let us spread the happiness..

  • Rich

    Totally agree. Whilst we’re at it, I’d like to throw poorly prepared homilies into the mix. When will priests get it, that for 5-10 minutes every week they have the opportunity to make a massive impression and to say something really meaningful?

  • Rich

    AgingPapist, why is it that every time I see your name come up I know you’re going to be outrageous? No one, no one can seriously hold these views, so I’ve come to the conclusion you’re a professional antagonist. Please, don’t stop! You successfully bring a smile to my face every time – wild.

  • Weary Convert

    I thought the point of my comment was the historically inaccurate claim by Mr Harper that corruption in the Papacy concerned “relatively few” Popes.  Instead, I suggested that corruption either, in short, of money or power was endemic in the organisation.  His response is to make strange remarks about reformation land grabs in the Celtic fringe, the relevance of which I find hard to unravel. And then, what on earth do these have to do with Newman’s essay?

    Further and so far as I can work it out, Mr Harper’s view is that anyone who disagrees with his complicated views must join an Anglican church.

    Without wanting to appear rude – and I see that 2 people like his comment, so he has some supporters – I fear one is dealing here with the approach of the pinball machine, the ball, or in this case, Mr Harper’s posiiton, bouncing around with with neither logic nor consistency.

  • Recusant

    You are mistaken. You use the word “corruption” in a very loose way to mean whatever you want. Pius V was not “corrupt” in any meaning of the word, he was personally austere and did not use his power for personal gain. He did, however, revive the Inquisition, which was disastous and wrong. So we may (or may not) judge him to be harsh, or bad, or upright or steadfast or whatever, but he was certainly not corrupt. I suspect your “long line” would shrivel if you used the word in it’s correct sense.

    And wanting to “change” the Church implies that it is a human institution that can be optimised for good outcomes, which is tending towards a heresy. The Church, including the Church in Purgatory and Heaven is a divine body, which we should always seek to renew or reorient towards God or find or clense, but “change” is not a word I am comfortable with.

  • Harper

    There is no point in engaging in a wearisome debate with Weary Convert, even if the issue is not very complicated. “Corruption”, as generally understood in relation to the Papacy, involves some area of personal moral weakness or scandal. Only a comparative handful come into this category. If any involvement in temporal affairs – the Papal States – is deemed “corruption”, then the net would of course be spread much wider, which is what Weary Convert seeks to do.

    The reference to Newman’s essay was intended to highlight not only the way that doctrine developed but the way the church developed with it. Weary Convert’s appeal to the practices of the “primitive” or “early church” is nothing new; this was at the heart of justifications for the reformation. What could be wrong in recommending churches to Weary Convert that already embody his principles? As regards the reformation land grabs,surely no reference to the primitive credentials of these churches would be complete without an awareness of these.

    Weary Convert is a “convert” to what: Rome? Why would he wish to choose or remain in such a church? If so, what can be wrong in recommending to him a possible route for rejuvenation in the waters of the reformed churches that have supposedly preserved the primitive practices he extols rather than the “corrupt” papacy he abhors?

    I strongly suspect, however, that Weary Convert is not a (Roman) Catholic at all, convert or otherwise, and has never been one, but that he is someone who is trying to imply by his subversive nom de plume that he is disillusioned, in order to dissuade those who might genuinely consider converting to the Catholic Church. There is surely a strong case for a change of nom de plume, when the cover has been blown. Perhaps he could enlighten us further about these particular issues with his characterisic “logic and consistency”, on which he manifesty prides himself so much (even if such pride was not a virtue in the “”).

  • Kennyinliverpool

    The issue is that the Church has lost its credibility in the eye of the people – rather than asking people to repent to the priest, surely the priest and Church establishment have to repent to the people – in a way that is believable. I know they have sort of already done this, but people are still very angry… I think more focus needs to be put in reconciliation, with the emphasis being placed on the church repenting for raping / abusing children?

  • Kennyinliverpool

    I think that the liturgy is an important, but different issue. People do not trust the Church because they abused children and then hid it up. Having nice singing and a bit of smelly smoke, will not overcome this. 
    The Church and its priests need to ask the people for forgiveness for the failures of the institutional Church.

  • Harper

    @kennyinliverpool: Those who share responsibility certainly need to do so, but not the great majority of clergy who were not involved, directly or indirectly. Collective and undifferentiated apologies are a curse in modern life, both ecclesiastical and secular, as they tend to remove personal responsibiliity and subsume this in public gestures that all too often degenerate into a meaningless sentimentality. Let those reponsible take responsibility, but equally let clergy who are innocent of this, and who were thus betrayed, enjoy our support and respect.

  • Weary Convert

    “Curiouser and curiouser” said Alice – how appropriate for the confused postings of Mr Harper.  He has now moved from a particular position regarding Papal “corruption” on which we disagreed, to the standard Ultra Catholic position that anyone who dares disagree with them cannot be a Catholic.  He suggests that I change my nom de plume: if I did and after reading his posts it might best become “Very Weary Convert but still trying to support the spirit in the Church which I learned when instructed by the Jesuits at Farm Street  when I joined the Church in 1965.”  But then, that is rather a mouthful so I shall stick with what I have and let Mr Harper continue on his meandering course as he plucks arguments from here and there to justify his Inquisition of someone who has dared to argue with him.

    I certainly see no point in continuing to “debate” with him – sadly an impossibility when dealing with the Ultras.

  • Harper

    There is indeed little point in debating with Weary Convert as he is finding the content too taxing. If he is indeed a convert, then all that can be said in his defence is that he was very poorly instructed by the Jesuits at Farm Street (speaking myself as one educated by the Society). Gone were the days of Frs Martindale and D’Arcy.1965 was a bad time for the Society and it has been downhill for them ever since in terms of recruitment (except in places such as India, where doctrinal discipline is still strong). When an order founded specifically to obey and uphold the Holy See turns against its fundamental charism, it cannot be expected to flourish, rather as a regiment which spent its time burning its colours and trashing its fundamental function would wither; the soldier Loyola would doubtless appreciate such an analogy.

    It seems tragic that Weary Convert remains so weary and tired out by a futile battle when there is such a variety of ecclesiastical communities embodying his ideals so freely available and where he would doubtless be happier..

  • Weary Convert

    I suppose that I was a little naughty dangling a Jesuitical lure before an Ultra just to see – as of course, I have – the inevitable Pavlovian reaction it would bring forth. 

    Goodbye and have a nice day!

  • Harper

    Weary Convert is clearly intellectually vain, in spite of his shortcomings, for he always feels he must have the last word. For one so critical of meandering arguments, his descent into Pavlovian analysis demonstrates a profound lack of self knowledge. His peeved parting salutation demonstrates how wounded his vanity is – what a tragic figure..

  • EditorCT

    One of the four marks of the Church is that the Church is holy.  The Church cannot “sin” – only individual members can sin.  Just as a schoolteacher cannot apologise or repent for the failings of other individuals in her school, or a doctor for the incompetents around him, so there is no-one who can “apologise” for “the Church” because “the Church” is “not guilty” of anything. 

    The reason for the child abuse and all of the other scandals of the past fifty years, is the faithless priests and bishops. Take a look at website of the Association of (Alleged) Catholic Priests in Ireland if you don’t believe me.  You won’t find fully believing Catholic priests abusing children or anyone else for that matter.  The problem is the widespread apostasy in Ireland, as elsewhere, evident on the ACP website, big time. Ireland, like everywhere else, just about, now has too many priests who have lost the faith (if ever they really had it – their motives for becoming priests are generally due to their desire to build a better world, help the poor climb the ladder of success etc. Not a true vocation to the priesthood) or who have been so poorly formed that they scarcely know right from wrong, especially in matters sexual.  The abuse of children, of course, suggests a whole different level of malformation – a lack of grace, which calls into question matters liturgical in the modern Church.  Quite apart from the impoverished new Mass, there’s the question I’m often asked by concerned Catholics – do priests ever go to Confession themselves? 

    We recognise the true Church of Christ by its four marks:  it is one, holy, catholic and apostolic. The Church is holy because Christ is holy.  You  cannot separate Christ from His Church.

    So please, do not fall into the media error of blaming “the Church” for the sins of its members, including priests and bishops.

  • EditorCT

    Can you point out where “God” tells us to be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion?  

    Your priest is being DISobedient by continuing to promote this liturgical abuse (forbidden in the 1997 Instruction from the Vatican) but that would be trumped by any instruction you’ve received from God.

    I’ve got my listening ears on….

  • EditorCT

    Don’t feel guilty.  Lay people should not be touching the Blessed Sacrament let alone playing at being priests. They don’t just look silly, they’re disobedient (to the entire Tradition of the Faith).  No wonder Archbishop Lefebvre described as “Satan’s masterstroke” to get Catholics to “disobey the whole of Tradition in the name of obedience.”

    Never a truer word.

  • AgingPapist

    Pius V was an evil pope. He plotted to have Queen Elizabeth assassinated.  Something the Church never wishes to bring about one of the saints.  What a laugh!

  • AgingPapist

     The people need to stop giving their money to these buggering priests and bishops and then arrange to have them sacked.  The latter must be done by people forcing the issue upon Benedict and each national hierarchy.  If they refuse, simply leave.  The CofE and the Lutherans or Orthodox have always been infinitely superior alternative Christian bodies to the present fetid swamp of degenerates running the Church.

  • AgingPapist

    No the Church of Rome has declined into a sect, and ,in time , it will be about as relevant to the culture around it as German Anabaptism and Lutheran 17th century Pietism are today. The Dunkards come to mind too.

    We are in the midst of the sequel to the 16th century Reformation now.  The losses will be far greater than anything the Jesuits were able to reverse in the last 450 years. Pope Benedict old boy, you and your court of clowns in purple can run but you cannot hide.

  • Weary Convert

    I had not intended to say any more on this posting but Mr Harper’s comment that I must always have the last word is in fact quite incorrect.  If he finds the time to trawl through other issues on this website, he will find occasions when I have deliberately “retired from the field” where I see that further exchanges are pointless.  This is certainly the case here.  In fact I feel that having now followed this website for some months, it is perhaps time that I retired from it altogether as the opportunities it allows to inject a little sanity and the Spirit of Vatican II into the dead world of the Ultras, I find increasingly difficult. It is fortunate that despite the degradation of The Catholic Herald from its great days at the time of the Council , the Ultras relentlessly pursuing their agenda of compulsory Latin Mass, religious fundamentalism, flawed history, and superstition on this website, are still so very few,  That might be merely amusing eccentricity but what I find turns my stomach is the hated that is evinced time and again against other Christian churches, women and girls in the Church (unless kept behind the altar rails), sexual minorities and anyone else with whom they disagree. I have referred to them as Ultras since, as every schoolboy knows, the Ultra supporters of returning Bourbons were said to have learned nothing and forgotten nothing (or perhaps the other way around – it hardly matters) - and so often the modern Ultras have fully lived up to that description. Perhaps one could almost admire them for their desperate last ditch defence of a world that has gone forever like the comment once made of a bishop (I think) that, “no cause was totally lost until bishop so-and-so had made it his own.”

    So I think that I shall now leave this website and can of course hear the calls of “good riddance” from the William Oddie Fan Club and Public Bar Shouting Society.  However, if the Ultras’ debates ever do find out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, I would be interested to know.

  • Recusant

    That’s not one I had heard before, is there any evidence for it outside your own head? Are you sure you are not mixing up “assassinated” and “excommunicated”? They are both quite long words.

  • Ratbag

    Let me make one thing crystal clear EditorCT. For this, you need to put your reading glasses on…

    I DO NOT regard myself as a priest substitute – oh, no way Jose!!!!! To even entertain that very thought would be a serious abuse of such a privilege and I would expect a swift shoe up my bum from the Pope by way of excommunication unless I beg his forgiveness!

    Well, what else would I call it if – completely out of the blue and totally unexpectedly 17 years ago- one is asked by the priest to help DISTRIBUTE Christ’s Own Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity at Mass to the faithful?

    I’m so undeserving, so unworthy and so humbled to be of the Lord’s service this way. Why shouldn’t I see it as obedience to a call from God and His priest?

    If my PP is his on his own (as other priests are busy administering to the sick, anxious and dying at the local large General Hospital complex… and be chaplains at the local international airport to say Mass or when a disaster happens, which is thankfully rare) then the parish priest is entitled to ask ministers for help i.e. myself and others at Mass in the parish church. 

    Actually, the only other glaring ‘Liturgical abuses’ I’ve witnessed is when the sacred vessels are emptied and purified by EMHEs. I know for a fact that only a priest or a deacon is authorised to do this… but they leave it to the ministers! Outrageous! Also, there are abuses of the Eucharist amongst the parishoners which make my hair stand on end. I’ve gone as far as I could possibly go in reporting these things to the PP. I cannot do any more than that.

    If there is one more abuse that is invisible to the naked eye, it is when ministers are NOT focused on WHO IS in the ciborium or chalice.

    … and, if my Bishop decides to write to all parishes to say that EMHEs no longer required- fine.

    So, on the other hand, what happens if there are plenty of priests available at Mass? Then we stay in our seats.


    It becomes a liturgical abuse when EMHEs are called to assist when there are adequate numbers of priests to distribute the sacred substances at Mass. 

    Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Eucharist go back to the early Christians, actually. They would take the sacrament to the sick … it then fell into disuse…then it made a comeback – in my parish at least - in the early 1990′s when I was first asked.

  • Ratbag

    I receive the Blessed Sacrament on the tongue – NEVER ON MY HAND!

  • Rich

    In my local parish, EMHEs trot off down the church to distribute the Eucharist. Not sure why the PP feels he needs them to do this, its a small church and we will have already walked at least twice as far to get from the car park to the front door. They also give “blessings” to those who don’t receive communion! Abuse. Just waiting for the day when B16 will sort this mess out too.

  • AgingPapist

    The Church cannot “sin” – only individual members can sin.
    This is outrageous poppycock. The Church IS made up of the people. That is all it is.  People sin, ergo the Church sins.  I wish the Catholic Church’s hierarchy and this pope would stop filling the heads of people like CT with childish rubbish and superstition.

  • Mary Wrenne

    The Eucharisitc Congress that is being planned in Dublin, Ireland,June 2012 will be a total waste of time as far as the revival of the Irish Church . How many of you have studied the programme of events? How pathetic!
    More of the merry-go-round of the touchy-feelie types, with “Let’s all hold hands now and sing “All shall be well” 
    Whatever happened to The Church Militant…….
    The Priestly Society  of Saint Pius X  have several Mass centres in Ireland and growing by the grace of God. I’ve learned more from them,( wonderful, holy men), in the first six months of attending  Mass,  three retreats and the First Friday and First Saturday devotions than I’ve learned in 40  years of wishy-washy Novus Ordo!!!! (Retreats for men and women will take place in Galway this July and August, respectively.) Check the web. S.S.P. X. retreat in Ireland.
    Forget all the  camp-fire sermonettes of Novus Ordo  with all the substance and nutrition of a marchmallow and find your nearest S.,S.P.X. Mass Centre.
    God bless you! 

  • Ratbag

    I agree with you 110%, Rich.

    For sure, if some of our priests are preaching their homilies with all the enthusiasm of a comatose goldfish, then what for the rest of us who have to sit through them?

    Would a course be available at any diocese/seminary which would combine the skills of clear writing, editing, clear vocal projection and microphone technique? It’s not to take away from our priests their theological, liturgical training, natural faith, humour and intellect. No. It’s to make the most and the very best of these things and build on them for God’s glory and His faithful.

    Priests are, after all, broadcasters of the Word of God and celebrants of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. 

    It’s no accident that some of them have made history in the media, especially The Servant of God Archbishop Foulton Sheen, The Servant of God Father Patrick Peyton, Father Brian D’Arcy on BBC Radio 2.

    However, there might be some priests who would feel hurt and affronted that they need to sharpen their skills at all, yet some are happy to inform lay readers that there are seminars on reading scripture properly at Mass… to not read it like a bus timetable, mumble to your chest, etc.

    At Pentecost, the Apostles received tongues of fire from the Holy Spirit after all… 


  • Parasum

    How *can there be* communion with bishops – the Pope included ! -  who have tolerated gross offences against the young, for may years, &  then try to shift the blame ? Only in the Catholic Church would it be regarded as anything but a sin crying out to Heaven for vengeance for clerical & religious abusers to be shielded from prosecution by the Irish hierarchy.

    A Eucharistic Congress will be a hollow sham, a sign of non-existent healing, non-existent reconciliation, & non-existent repentance.

  • Rich

    AgingPapist, you are so wrong. So wrong that I hardly know where to start. Many, many hours on this blog with you will only scratch the surface. Good luck fella.

  • Ratbag

    Indeed, Rich, indeed I – too - really hope and pray that our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, will take his famous quality sweeping brush (and top quality vacuum cleaner) to sweep up the dustcloud and muck of uncertainty with regards to what EMHEs are there to do and what they are categorically NOT supposed to do!

    I wish the PP would say to the faithful – before communion – that anyone not receiving Holy Communion for whatever reason - is invited to walk up, with hands crossed over their chest, and receive a blessing from HIM and NOT the EMHEs.

    Unfortunately, this does not happen. The EMHE concerned is faced with a difficult dilemma. What does one do? Hold up The Host and utter ‘.. in the name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit’. This is not made clear at any course I’ve attended – and such courses have been few and far between!

    Like you, I can’t understand the logic or necessity of EMHEs going to various parts of a small church to do their duty. I’d understand if there is a large congregation in a large church but this … tsk! Tsk! Tsk!

    There are incidences where EMHEs go to elderly parishoners unable to walk up to the altar.

    Then again, where is the patience and reverence of the faithful when it comes to receiving Our Lord? Anyone would think that the Eucharist is on a ‘first come, first served’ basis!

    Contrast that regular scenario with kneeling at the altar rails or on prie-dieus at a EF Mass… a marked difference!

    Going back to the Eucharistic Congress in Dublin next year…

    Anyone expecting a display all the clerics involved to wear sackcloth, ashes, beat their breasts, flagelate themselves followed by a cacophony of a million ‘mea culpas’ in Ireland before they are lined up against a wall to be shot… will be sorely disappointed. 

    Why? Well, those who want to keep slagging off the Roman Catholic Church will never ever be satisfied…they don’t want to be satisfied, especially those who spout their vitriol and do so on the backs of the victims they pretend to care about.

    Ireland is not the only country affected by clerical sex abuse and should do well to bear that in mind when most of its citizens think it’s the only victim of A FEW SINFUL, EVIL people.

  • Ratbag

    Pope Benedict XVI has already apologised for the nth time (and was at the forefront of removing the ‘filth’, as he famously called the clerical abusers) and a letter from the Bishops of England and Wales read out to ALL CHURCHES issued an unreserved apology for the abuses done by A FEW EVIL, SINFUL individuals.

    You cannot judge the Church on the actions of a few, no more than you can judge all Muslims for 9/11.

    You keep swallowing the screaming headlines and militant atheist guff in the newspapers and media until it chokes – but what on earth do you want the Roman Catholic Church to do that it hasn’t already done?

    There’s no answer to that because, even if there is one, you will continue to be bitter and revel in being such until your precious energy is exhausted.

  • guest

    It wasn’t just sexual abuse, it was mental and physical abuse in the Catholic institutions inflicted on children by nuns and priests. The abuse never, ever goes away for the victims, something Ratbag doesn’t seem to understand.  Even if people weren’t personally abused, they know people that were. The Catholic Church had the power to remove children from their homes and take babies away from their mothers if a child was born out of wedlock (if I was born in Ireland, I would have been taken from my Mother.) and young sons were given to the seminary for training to become priests as young as eleven (see Comedian Johnny Vegas). The Irish are rejecting the Catholic Church state, not just the church.

  • Ratbag

    What do you mean ‘Ratbag’ doesn’t understand?  Ratty flaming well DOES UNDERSTAND!

    For years and years, my family regailed blood-curdling stories about what certain priests and people did in their respective ‘sticks’ to different people including MY family. Their experiences were as far removed from the love of Christ and His Blessed Mother AND the Church as was humanly possible.

    But, somehow, my family’s faith remained healthy and level-headed. That Christ and His Blessed Mother were far, far bigger and greater than those who were supposed to carry the faith with joy and forgiveness.

    The Irish Government of the day were just as much to blame and sections of Irish society should also hang its head in shame for the heretical and disgusting attitude it had towards the vulnerable and innocent.

    I’ve read the Ryan and Murphy Reports from cover to cover.

    A distant cousin of mine was ‘conscripted’ to the missions in Bombay (Mumbai) when he was a teenager… and he ended up educating the children of a family in the Indian Government!

    The Roman Catholic Church in Ireland was, for far too long, a law unto itself. Pope Benedict XVI said so in not so many words in his book ‘Light of the World’. He’s spot on.

    Why do you think he sent an Apostolic Visitation to Ireland? It certainly wasn’t to give them a pat on the back and a dozen gold roses. No, sir!

    It’s time to look at the bigger picture with regards the Roman Catholic Church.

    To say that the Irish are rejecting the Catholic Church is too much of a generalisation.

  • ealan

    Dear Mary,
    It is a shame you do not mention all the problems Saint Pius X have caused around the world with their comments about the popes, those going to Novus Ordus, the Novus ordus being invalid and other heretical statements let alone the vitriolic and bad behavior of many within St.Pius X. Oh and let us not forget the denial of the holocaust!

  • ealan

    I do not agree with lay people giving out the Eucharist and I always receive on the tongue but we should remember that disobedience is one of the great weapons of satan and who was disobedient to the Pope? Archbishop Lefebvre!  and those he led into disobedience. Tradition without loving obedience is the same tradition Jesus spoke of with the Pharisees.

  • Dcruz

    When the next potato famine or any disaster will happen in Ireland, faith will be revived. Till such time the church and the family should do its part to revive faith and practice.

  • EditorCT

     You are WAY behind the times, Sugar Plum.  Anyone educated in the subject knows that the SSPX do not say that the NO is “invalid” – but even the much lauded liturgical expert, Mgr Klaus Gamber, said that there is no doubt that the number if invalid Masses has increased since the introduction of the NO – he says this in his book Reform of the Roman Liturgy, with a preface in the French edition by Cardinal Ratzinger who said, in the same preface, that the NO was “a fabricated, on the spot production.”  Get yourself reading on the subject before you enter into public discussion.

    Name any heretical statement, with source, by the SSPX.  Even one.

    And for goodness sake – are we not allowed to investigate and question details of the holocaust as we are permitted to investigate and question other atrocities and wars?  Do you not worry that someone, anyone can be imprisoned for asking a question?  What about the group in the USA who don’t believe man has landed on the moon?  Are they all to be imprisoned?

    Behave yourself. You’re anti-Tradition bias is showing. And you can’t be a Catholic without adhering to the ENTIRE Catholic Tradition.  Behave.

  • EditorCT

     The system if not allowing me to edit my comment so I can’t correct “You’re” in the final paragraph of my last comment, which should read “Your”.

  • EditorCT

    Archbishop Lefebvre said that it was Satan’s masterstroke to get Catholics to dsobey the whole of Tradition in the name of obedience.  Spot on.   It is  FALSE obedience that is Satan’s greatest weapon within the Church today. And he’s been highly successful as your post demonstrate. Stop reading the Tablet and bu yourself a copy of the writings of Saint (Cardinal) Robert Bellarmine on the extent and limits of papal authority.  That’s a good starting point.

    Whatever, with respect, you happen to “agree” with or not, is neither here nor there.  Laity giving out Communion is disobedient to the entire Tradition of the Church, as stated in recent documents.  The Popes have weakly  tried to put an end to this diabolical practice but refuse to enforce their own documents and Canon Law. 

    You’re never going to make a Scripture scholar either, given your misapplication of Jesus’s words to the Pharisees.

    You can’t judge the heart of anyone to see whether their adherence to Tradition is “loving” or not.   The Catholic soul adheres to Tradition and his motives for doing so are irrelevant to you and to me.

    When was the last time your priest mentioned Hell or even Purgatory, in a warning sermon?

  • EditorCT

    Certificate of Achievement in the post.

  • In Our Times

    I’m sure if you listen to your own conscience Weary, the highest & most universal platform for your undoubted talent will be called forth. (They might be giving you some sound advice.) But before you depart, I have a question; as you seem to be so good at categorising Catholics. (You speak of & for all the “real” Catholics out there, whom unless you are claiming omnipotence, can’t really know that many intimately & personally; so “speaking” for them as a whole would be impossible. However, I’m sure you realise that…)  Would you take a look at the following pieces of text & assign a ‘label’? From some fictional text (& regarding his involvement with the Church of England, on his path to Catholicism) he wrote “…things were ok for a while, and then I discovered the vipers nest of homosexuals, pagans, atheists, secularists and radicals that lay beneath the establishment manners and surface respectability…” And from some non-fictional text: “…And the Papacy has been shown in recent experience to be the only body capable of resisting the ‘dictatorship of relativism’. The sole institutional basis of resistance is the authority that persists in the Roman Catholic Church in the independent doctrinal authority of the Papacy…. …It alone is capable of the undermining of foundations that was entailed by the revision of theology to derive from the independent conscience at the Reformation…There is no doubt that their ability to maintain the teaching of orthodox doctrine is superior, and that, in the end, is what matters…”   I’m not sure whose recent experience he’s referring to, but I would beg to differ of course. Whatever the Spirit of Vatican II means, a lot of it looks like ‘tokenism’ from my end. So what do you think? Any hope for him?